Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: DiogenesLamp

20 years is your figure, but the common one is 50 years - also quoted by notable people in the secretive aviation community like Kelly Johnson and others who worked at either the Phantom or Skunkworks


47 posted on 05/14/2020 6:32:08 AM PDT by PIF (They came for me and mine ... now its your turn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]


To: PIF
20 years is your figure, but the common one is 50 years - also quoted by notable people in the secretive aviation community like Kelly Johnson and others who worked at either the Phantom or Skunkworks

Well they should be in a better position to know than I, but I suspects the issue hinges on how we define "50 years ahead".

Perhaps they are talking about 50 years ahead of adoption by the commercial industry or some such?

I would also have to say it's not necessarily linear, and that modern companies are more willing to adopt advanced technology faster than they were in the past.

Also, I wonder if they are taking into account the non linearity of research and development? The more we learn, the faster we develop new technologies. 50 years later at a linear progression is a very different thing than 50 years later at an exponential progression.

I happen to know the Navy is very interested in Fusion propulsion systems for their ships because they had/are funding the Polywell fusion reactor research. If the technology is viable, we will likely have fusion powered ships, planes, trucks, whatever in much less than 50 years.

50 years advanced from now? It's unfathomable.

Warp drive maybe.

59 posted on 05/14/2020 7:28:46 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp ("of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson